TRANSPARENCY: A secretive Government Service Insurance System is evading valid questions on its foreign placements.

Why did the $600 million invested abroad by GSIS grow only by five percent when the fund’s earning alone from the improvement of the peso’s value against the US dollar is already almost 12 percent?

The Trade Union Congress of the Philippines said that, based on the peso’s performance, the $600 million should have grown by at least P2.92 billion (11.65 percent) over the last six months and not just P1.245 billion as claimed by GSIS.

The GSIS has reported that its Global Investment Program (GIP) “posted an impressive growth in the total value of investments of five percent to P1.245 billion as of Sept. 30, 2008.”

Finding it curious that GSIS reports on its foreign placements only in pesos, and not in both dollars and pesos, TUCP secretary-general Ernesto Herrera said: “We suspect the $600 million original investment may have already lost face value in dollar terms.”

* * *

WHERE IS IT?: The GSIS has explained that the foreign exchange rate is just one of the factors affecting the fund’s earnings. But that raises more questions.

Whether the GSIS earned P1.245 billion (its claim) or P2.92 billion (Herrera’s figure), that was not the key concern raised by members anxious over the collapse of big investment houses abroad.

Members are simply asking where their $600 billion went. That should not be too difficult to answer.

With a few clicks on the computer, GSIS president and general manager Winston Garcia should be able to print out a breakdown listing the amounts, where invested, the status and other details.

* * *

CASH FLOW: The GSIS’s evasive explanations leave its 1.4 million members hanging, opening them to all sorts of speculations.

Many of them now want to know, for instance, how true is it that the GSIS is having cash flow problems.

They have noticed that the GSIS has stopped lump sum retirement payments and now issues only monthly checks. Also, it now bases members’ benefits only on their contributions if their employer-agencies have failed to pay their shares.

Why are captive GSIS members being penalized, in effect, for the failings of the system and its managers? Why are they made to suffer as a result of the criminal neglect of their employers?

* * *

TOUGH JOB: At the National Power Corp., it helps that its new president Froilan Tampinco is an industry insider and an experienced hand. But he needs much more than that.

Tampinco was vice president of the Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management Corp. handling the privatization of state-owned power assets.

We assume that his marching orders include lowering or at least stabilizing electricity rates and speeding up the privatization of Napocor so as to move it faster to an open-market regime.

But he might have a hard time if he tries breaking up and prosecuting members of a mafia blamed for the overpricing of equipment and supplies, notably fuel. Overpricing has bloated generation costs.

* * *

INTRAMS: There seems to be confusion, meanwhile, over a case endorsed by the Makati prosecutor’s office to the Regional Trial Court involving associates of a firm called Clay&Feather that supplies equipment and bullets for trap and skeet shooting.

Available documents do not show either basis or probable cause for the case to prosper beyond the prosecutor’s office. An offshoot of an intra-corporate dispute, the case looks more like harassment.

It caught my attention because of reports that a son of an influential socialite who shot to prominence during the Ramos administration had pressured the prosecutor to file the complaint.

The Department of Justice may want to look into it, especially now that the justice system is under scrutiny.

* * *

ABORTION, ANYONE?: Now listen to my favorite election lawyer, Romy Macalintal, who should be in the Senate in 2010, if the chamber would still be there by then:

“When Leo Echegaray was convicted for the crime of raping his 10-year old daughter in April 1994 and meted out the death penalty, most of our lawmakers realized that capital punishment is not in accordance with God’s plan for men and society. Thus, on June 24, 2006, Congress passed RA 9346 prohibiting the death penalty even for heinous crimes.

“Surprisingly, however, some legislators are now pushing for the ‘Reproductive Health (RH) Bill’ allowing family planning or birth control methods using contraceptives that could cause abortion. A provision of the bill talks about ‘post-abortion complications’ which shows that it promotes abortion, for, otherwise, that provision would not be there.

“If such contraceptives or birth control methods could cause abortion or kill the unborn child, how could these legislators easily forget their position against the imposition of death penalty even on criminals who had committed heinous crimes?

“Why allow these criminals to enjoy the gift of life, but deny the same right to the innocent and sinless unborn child, or abort the seed of life that God gave to mankind to grow and multiply?  It is not for us to interfere with the recipe of the Lord.

“If we opposed the death penalty because of our belief that only God could take the life of anyone, then with more reason that an unborn child should not be penalized by putting its life in danger or be an innocent victim of abortion.

“If we recognize ‘animals’ rights’ to the extent of having our pets or animals ‘blessed’ during the Feast of St. Francis of Assisi, should not the unborn child be entitled to a higher degree of care and protection?”